I am fascinated by the wide divergence of tasting impressions for any given whisky by different tasters.
Yesterday, I read a review of The Balvenie Doublewood 12, one of my favorites, bemoaning the lack of a finish. Nothing could be further from my experience. I get a long-lasting, slightly warming, rich, very dark chocolate with a hint of Maraschino cherries and a whiff of smoke - absolutely delicious.
I have a theory. Some of the diversity of tasting reviews can certainly be attributed to the wide range of personal experience among reviewers and the resulting differences in vocabulary (I have never tasted a sultana, nor do I have any idea what the difference is in taste between raw and processed honey.)
As a relative newbie to malts, I also recognize that tastes can change over time. Even so, there must be another factor. Could it be a difference in olfactory and flavor receptor chemistry from taster to taster? I think so.
That is the only explanation I can imagine for the existence of the market for incendiary peat bombs.
To each his own. It's all good!